All of those things have the potential to be incorporated into a healthy lifestyle and have various benefits, smoking has no benefits whatsoever to human beings, zero. It's not exactly a grey area

Actually smoking over short periods of time with a great deal of self control can help with weight loss.

Provided you have the willpower to curb the addictive effects, it speeds up your metabolism and shrinks appetite. If you can manage to quit following weight-loss, maintain the exercise regimen and avoid returning to old dietary habits, you can keep that weight off. The risk-factors (particularly cancer) of smoking are mitigated fairly quickly if you quit quickly and don't start again.

Granted it's a difficult thing to do, but so is incorporating McDonalds and Alcohol into a healthy lifestyle.

Actually smoking over short periods of time with a great deal of self control can help with weight loss.

Provided you have the willpower to curb the addictive effects, it speeds up your metabolism and shrinks appetite. If you can manage to quit following weight-loss, maintain the exercise regimen and avoid returning to old dietary habits, you can keep that weight off. The risk-factors (particularly cancer) of smoking are mitigated fairly quickly if you quit quickly and don't start again.

Granted it's a difficult thing to do, but so is incorporating McDonalds and Alcohol into a healthy lifestyle.

Mcdonalds yes, but alcohol is quite easy to do, drinking a glass a day can help prevent heart problems.

You're right, we should legalize masturbation and sex in public. People should have rights to do whatever they want to.
Who cares if this bothers anyone.

Edited:

We should also legalize racial hate speeches in public. Because who cares if it bothers anyone, amrite?

Racial hate speeches ARE legal, at very least they are in America. Speech is a victimless crime.

And why NOT legalize public nudity? Who is the victim there? Who do you think you are to act like the victim because you saw shit that you know exists, have seen before, but for pseudo-religious reasons find uncomfortable to witness? Who are you to impose your shame upon the world?

Masturbation and sex in public are probably less harmful to people in public places, but since smoking outside poses very little risk I don't see the point in complaining about it.

But you can't really use that in support of banning smoking indoors. That's a choice that the establishment in question makes. There are plenty of restaurants, bars, apartment complexes, etc. that disallow smoking. MOST of those places DO disallow smoking. You cannot turn around and tell the few places that don't to go fuck themselves because they don't know what's good for them.

Masturbation and sex in public are probably less harmful to people in public places, but since smoking outside poses very little risk I don't see the point in complaining about it.

well socially masturbation and sex in public would be more offensive to people, but i don't really care about that.
my point is that smoking is not offensive, it's not harmful to others in an open air space, it's already legal, it's good capitalist business (America's #2 export!, not supporting the industry just the economy gained from it), and policing the decisions of other people is harmful. there is no reason for smoking to become illegal just because it's harmful, and putting a huge price on cigarettes is going to be awful to smokers because they will still pay that premium, thus perpetuating economical inequality.

But you can't really use that in support of banning smoking indoors. That's a choice that the establishment in question makes. There are plenty of restaurants, bars, apartment complexes, etc. that disallow smoking. MOST of those places DO disallow smoking. You cannot turn around and tell the few places that don't to go fuck themselves because they don't know what's good for them.

What about staff who work their but have no choice on the rule? Especially in the current economic climate where people have little choice over which job they have, I think it's unfair that they should be forced to be exposed to unhealthy fumes in an enclosed environment.

Cigarettes and smokers should be ostracised further, recent studies show (I think it was actually a thread in this section) that people are far more likely to give up smoking because of the social stigma rather than price increase or health warnings. Raise the price? Sure, great idea, get some more revenue in and create an entry barrier for new people trying to smoke, but dedicated smokers will just bust all their cash on it and nothing will have changed.

well socially masturbation and sex in public would be more offensive to people, but i don't really care about that.
my point is that smoking is not offensive, it's not harmful to others in an open air space, it's already legal, it's good capitalist business (America's #2 export!, not supporting the industry just the economy gained from it), and policing the decisions of other people is harmful. there is no reason for smoking to become illegal just because it's harmful, and putting a huge price on cigarettes is going to be awful to smokers because they will still pay that premium, thus perpetuating economical inequality.

"Smoking is a good business." is a retarded argument. Prostitution and drug dealing is a god business as well.

Cigarettes and smokers should be ostracised further, recent studies show (I think it was actually a thread in this section) that people are far more likely to give up smoking because of the social stigma rather than price increase or health warnings. Raise the price? Sure, great idea, get some more revenue in and create an entry barrier for new people trying to smoke, but dedicated smokers will just bust all their cash on it and nothing will have changed.

"Smoking is a good business." is a retarded argument. Prostitution and drug dealing is a god business as well.

Why shouldn't those be legal?

Prostitution IS legal in Reno, Nevada, and it's worked out extremely fucking well. The brothels are operated by the prostitutes themselves. There are no pimps. Security is extremely tight, STD screenings are weekly for the prostitutes and spot-checked on clients. Contraception is required. The women can go to the police if someone tries something. The women don't get beaten and abused, and a good chunk of revenue goes toward the county.

Illegal prostitution works upon extortion and pseudo-slave-labor. Legalized prostitution is extremely safe for all parties involved, and the prostitutes can refuse service for any reason they want if they feel threatened or uncomfortable. They can quit whenever they want, and there's opportunities for advancement toward a managerial position in the brothel.

In my personal opinion, prostitution should be legal for the same reason you just gave, but I know that most people disagree.
What about drug dealing? That makes a good business. Weapon dealing as well (yeah, any blood crazy maniac can buy a gun in US).

In my personal opinion, prostitution should be legal for the same reason you just gave, but I know that most people disagree.
What about drug dealing? That makes a good business. Weapon dealing as well (yeah, any blood crazy maniac can buy a gun in US).

Legalized drug-dealing allows for regulation, quality-assurance, and massive revenue for the local, state and federal governments. We're talking billions of dollars, here. A small chunk of that revenue could afford a massive overhaul of our rehabilitation systems to ensure there is a legitimate "out" of the habit. The drugs could be dealt through government owned/regulated facilities (such as Virginia's ABC Liquor Stores, which are the only places in Virginia to purchase hard liquor as it is). As such, government regulation can dictate usage and purchase limits, keeping files on each customer and tracking their usage habits.

Overdose would become much less of an issue, as the government dealers could refuse to sell over-dosable amounts. The quality of the drugs could be assured (i.e. nothing will be laced with something else,) and the data tracking on customers and clients could make the police's job that much easier when somebody attempts to abuse the system (e.g. if someone starts selling drugs they got at Gov.-Drug on the street, the government has all the evidence they need in the system to convict).

This would also save a ridiculous amount of money by dismantling the "drug war," and in the U.S.'s case, curb the drug-smuggling businesses in Central American nations (Mexico/Columbia) by taking away their biggest clients (US), reducing the impact of gang violence below the border.

As it stands, in nations where drugs are illegal, they're an outlaw trade. They can't be regulated, monitored or controlled.

Why are people arguing FOR smoking, would you walk up to someone and flip them off? Assuming you wouldn't, why would you light up a cigarette or smoke with people in the nearby proximity? Considering that you're giving them the effects of second hand smoke too I think it's a pretty fair comparison to giving them the finger, and not much of a stretch to say it's bloody disrespectful to smoke in public, and should be banned- if not only for the fact other people don't want the lung cancer a smoker is too addicted to do anything about.

Why are people arguing FOR smoking, would you walk up to someone and flip them off? Assuming you wouldn't, why would you light up a cigarette or smoke with people in the nearby proximity? Considering that you're giving them the effects of second hand smoke too I think it's a pretty fair comparison to say it's bloody disrespectful to smoke in public, and should be banned, if not only for the fact other people don't want the lung cancer a smoker is too addicted to do anything about.

Why are people arguing FOR smoking, would you walk up to someone and flip them off? Assuming you wouldn't, why would you light up a cigarette or smoke with people in the nearby proximity? Considering that you're giving them the effects of second hand smoke too I think it's a pretty fair comparison to giving them the finger, and not much of a stretch to say it's bloody disrespectful to smoke in public, and should be banned- if not only for the fact other people don't want the lung cancer a smoker is too addicted to do anything about.

Giving people the finger isn't illegal and respect is not a mandate. Respect without choice is false respect. Respect only means something because you don't HAVE to respect someone else. To mandate it is to destroy its integrity.

Do not attempt to stand on "respect." To legislate respect is asinine.